Imam al-Ghazali vs Ibn Sina | Shaykh Asim Yusuf |

Dr. Asim Yusuf is a teacher, author vocalist and medical doctor. He was born in London and grew up in Manchester, before emigrating to South Africa with his family for a ten year stay. He has been studying the sacred sciences for many years with many notable scholars including Al-Allama Rasool Bakhsh Saeedi, Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi amongst others. He is the academic director of the Path to Salvation (www.pathtosalvation.co.uk), an integrative modular syllabus of Islamic studies. He has been authorized to instruct students in a number of Islamic sciences, and currently teaches theology, jurisprudence, spirituality, tafsir and hadith. Dr. Asim is also a member of the Royal College of Psychiatrists and is currently pursuing his Masters in Medical Education.
Hamza Yusuf. Abdul Hakim Murad, Habib Ali Jifri. Habib Umar. Sufi. Sufism. Mawlid. Bidah. Quran. Sunnah. Allah. Prophet Muhammad.

[@imranmunsif2351]

Ya Samad, Ya Qayyum (All greatness is due to Him) send prayers, peace and blessings upon our Master Muhammad (and upon his family and companions), the medicine of hearts and their treatment, the soundness of bodies and their cure, the light of vision and it's illumination, the spirit of all spirits and the secret of their endurance.

[@Peacetoself]

Fascinating lecture thanks for the upload

[@mosanepmontilo4818]

Very well explained. Thank you brother.

[@doctorikon]

continue your good work.

[@RWOOFKASHMIRI]

On one hand we are proud of all the scientific contributions but then turn around and hate the ideas that made them who they are. Wow.

[@SirJamestheIII]

Aquinas certainly did not see revelation as an emergent quality of reason. He was doing a similar thing to ghazali but with respect to the dialectics (eg abelard) who had acquired a snapshot of Aristotlean works via boethius. The dialectics were actively attacking revelation from scripture with syllogistic reasoning. It is important to remember the university of Paris was not like the madrasas and the Catholic Church was fighting for legitimacy. Aquinas was more sympathetic to ghazali than Ibn sina and Ibn rushd

[@mariyakhan5387]

Do you have any audio on al ghazali occasionalism. Kindly share.

[@mohdyounus8353]

Ghazali never opposed the scientific works but his theological beliefs

[@mariyakhan5387]

Very nice. Alhamdulillah for saving our minds and kudos to sheykh Al Ghazali for refuting the philosophers in his incoherence of philosophers

[@ArchHades]

Ghazali did not refute anything, he just reverted to dogma instead of reason. Ibn Sina was the far superior philosopher.

[@karimb972]

@@ArchHades you obviously didn't read Al Ghazali's books

[@soheil527]

@@ArchHades He beat them fair and square. he inspired christian scholastics till st thomas

[@thephilosophermma8449]

@@ArchHades Certainly

[@saim6749]

@@ArchHades Ibn Sina wasn't a non-muslim, lol! He believed in everything but had a different perspective which destroyed his aqeedah. He also believed in Shariah and all the legislation.

[@epsonstyluscx3650]

where can I find the full lecture please?

[@ehsankhorasani_]

I am happy that ibn-sina is from balkh Afghanistan

[@JohnSmith-rz7fh]

To be fair, the tahaafut was more of a polemic than a philosophic refutation........

[@ehsankhorasani_]

ibn-sina book in medicine was 700 years the only reference of medicine

[@dubbelkastrull]

8:30 bookmark

[@Flyingjos]

In Christian Orthodoxy we have many same cases like Ibn Sina, of men and women who studied many sciences of their time. Byzantium and Constantinople was always a bright..maybe the brightest spot for scholars. But these saints of ours never had nothing else to learn, because Orthodoxy was always a living way of knowing God. The more you live in Jesus teachings the more you experience Gods love, mercy, compassion etc. Since these characteristics are infinite in amount in God then the experience of them is infinite in progress. Some of them at the end of their lives express the wish of having more time in order to learn more about repentance in the example of Jesus Christ. So living and knowing or better said experiencing Gods gifts can never being boring.... ps sorry for my poor English.

[@hmul3399]

13.00

[@dann5480]

Ghazali the village fool could never dream of standing toe to toe with the great Ibn Sina

[@pranknation3729]

This is video is misleading Subhanna Allah

[@manamenoja2721]

Why is it misleading

[@adamelkasovic5611]

he is consistent with other scholars

[@yourstruly5706]

Is ibn Sina wrong? The aqal recongises Allah through nature, observation, deduction, induction etc. The natural inclination is to look for a power greater than you. The problem comes when there's an issue of corrupted aqali arguments. You then have to look to the divine work at this point, to verify. If there's a flaw, then you have to work out where the flaw is to fix the aqal. You could say the book of Allah sits in judgement over the aqal to rectify the problems with it. It gives aqali examplea for a reason.

[@yourstruly5706]

Also, I'm not sure about Ibn Sina's parents being Ismaili or him being one. From what I understand he was Hanefi in jurisprudence, even if not true the Abbasid Caliphate wasn't Ismaili and the latters influence was towards the levant. Some of these claims seem to be meritless slander of ibn Sina in promotion of the İhya.

[@factspossible6670]

@@yourstruly5706 ibn Sina parents were Ismaili, he was not! Nowhere has the speaker said that he was that is your presumption.

[@yourstruly5706]

@@factspossible6670 put is this way, he mentioned they were Ismaili, but did he me tion ibn Sina wasn't? The inference is that hebwas Ismaili by extension.

[@meritonjuniku5493]

he neglected philosophy dafuq?

[@ShahsawarM]

Al kindi too had heretical beliefs so how can he be of the ulema ?

[@aminahrolsdorph8551]

Excuse Me?

[@aminahrolsdorph8551]

It's a Very superficial comment. Or Dogmatism maybe.. Philosophy Can be Very Dangerous .. That does Not exclude Philosophy from our Vocabulary.. Just Like Poetry.. This having Nothing to Do with disrespecting Classical Orthodox Islamic Creed & Teaching. Oceans of..

[@aminahrolsdorph8551]

Reflections.. Upon Truth .. Can Become Philosophical Expressions Yet Based honestly upon Truth..

[@ShahsawarM]

I never said to exclude philosophy . It is a very useful tool . Please read up al kindi on philosophy and revelation to understand why i said he had heretical views

[@aminahrolsdorph8551]

@@ShahsawarM ok.. I apologize for my misunderstanding.. My ignorance @ ..

[@mohdyounus8353]

Ghazali never opposed the scientific works but his theological beliefs

[@saqibsheikh2790]

That was the effect if not the intention

[@karimb972]

@@saqibsheikh2790 sorry brother, that's just modernist mythology. Some people are looking for a "culprit" for our situation but Al Ghazali is the last person responsible for it. Quite the opposite actually. Also, the West success is a mirage as it's unsustainable and founded on unparalleled and unreproducible violence and plunder. People who want us to live in opulence like the West and think that we don't have that because Sunnis won over the Muatazila are looking at things with a materialistic outlook.

[@ARKAN9765]

@@karimb972 what kind of argument you are talking about? The main topics is since tahafut al falasifa, scientific development and rational free thought is almost vanished completely.... How many muslim world are nobel prize winner in science? Compare that with jews or christian?

[@SirJamestheIII]

@@saqibsheikh2790 mutazilla were neoplatonists. They did not encourage empirical sciences (they didn’t discourage it either) Ibn sina himself was skeptical of Neoplatonism and was aware of Aristotle but ironically the ashari and ghazali had a better understanding of Aristotle since it was the asharite astronomers who were scrutinizing Aristotlean cosmology. Al biruni was asharite, but a scientist. Same for al-razi who came after ghazali. There are other asharite scientists. Mutazilla were Neoplatonic philosophers and don’t really have lasting scientific contributions whereas asharite criticisms of Aristotlean cosmology. Ibn sina‘s work in medicine by comparison is hopelessly dated. It’s hilarious to say that ghazali was responsible for the decline in scientific progress when the Ash’ari were the ones doing what would resemble modern science.

[@factspossible6670]

@@ARKAN9765 that is a stupid argument. I guess you have listened to Neil De Grass Tyson, After Ghazali in the Ottoman Era Philosophical speculation was thriving, Khwarizmis were doing great stuff in mathematics, what you have taken is reductionist approach and you should be ashamed of yourself. How can you deny the Colonial impact and all of the history and make Ghazali the culprit of the downfall that is stupidity at its peak it shows that you haven’t read anything actually you are just fond of watching videos on youtube. Colonial Era and Salafi Wahhabia Atharis are the real Culprits.